Disposed

Thangaraj v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC1 Nov 2021WP/23555/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 praying for a direction to the District Collector, Revenue Divisional Officer, and Tahsildar to consider representations dated 03.08.2021 regarding a 0.70 hectare land classified as Arulmigu Koil land. The Court issued a direction to dispose of the representation within 16 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents 4, 7, and 8 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.08.2021 and pass appropriate orders within sixteen weeks after giving an opportunity of personal hearing.

Thangaraj Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.11.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶5

W.P.No.23555 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.24773 of 2021

¶6

1.Thangaraj

¶7

2.Kennady

¶8

3.Kirubananthan

¶9

4.Vinoth Kumar ...Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary of Government, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, For.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶12

The Commissioner,

¶13

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 035.

¶14

The Joint Commissioner,

¶15

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶16

The District Collector, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶17

The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶18

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ambattur Police Districy, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.

¶19

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kundrathur, Kancheepuram District.

¶20

The Tahsildar,

¶21

Kundrathur Taluk Office, Kundrathur, Kancheepuram District.

¶22

The Inspector of Police,

¶23

Mangadu Police Station, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 4, 7 & 8 to consider and thereby disposing the representation made by the petitioners on 03.08.2021 for survey, protect and declared the temple of Arulmigu Koil (Government Poramboke) and his property situated at Kanchipuram District, Kundrathur Taluk, Chennai 600 122, Mangadu A Village, Old Survey Nos.138, 138/1 and 138/2, New Survey Number 138/7 measuring to an extent of 0.70 Hectare Square Meter/Ares of land belongs to Arulmigu Koil/Bajanai Kodam.

¶26

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Yuvaraj

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 4, 7 & 8 to consider and thereby disposing the representation made by the petitioners on 03.08.2021 to survey, protect and declare the temple of Arulmigu Koil (Government Poramboke) and their property situated at Kanchipuram District, Kundrathur Taluk, Chennai 600 122, Mangadu A Village, Old Survey Nos.138, 138/1 and 138/2, New Survey Number 138/7 measuring to an extent of 0.70 Hectare Square Meter/Ares of land belongs to Arulmigu Koil/Bajanai Kodam.

¶29

The aforesaid temple property belongs to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board (HR&CE). The petitioners are the devotees of Kamachi Amman, Sri Selva Vinayagar and Vallar Swami at Mangadu, Chennai. Moreover, in the Revenue Records, the said land classified as Arulmigu Koil (Government Poramboke). Now, the temple property is utilized by the Vallar Sangam. The petitioners and other persons have jointly together providing the foods to the people. In the circumstances, some miscreants' are trying to grab this alleged temple property. Therefore, the petitioner along with others have approached the HR&CE Board, but everything is ended vain. Hence, the petitioners sent a representation to the 4th respondent/Collector, Kancheepuram and he sent a letter o.mu.No.16082/2020/A3, dated 00.11.2020 ordered to the 8th respondent/Tahsildar to survey the alleged temple property and issue the village records based on the 3rd respondent/Joint Commissioner letter dated 12.11.2020. Finally, the 3rd petitioner gave a representation to the 8th respondent/Tahsildar to protect the alleged temple, but the officials of the Revenue Department have not considered on the representations of the petitioners dated 12.11.2020, 18.11.2020, 22.02.2021, 01.04.2021 and 03.08.2021. Therefore, the petitioners have come forward with the present writ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petition.

¶30

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents 4, 7 and 8 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.08.2021 and dispose of the same within a stipulated time that may be framed by this Court.

¶31

Having regard to the limited scope of the prayer that is now sought for in this writ petition before this Court and taking into account the submissions made on either side, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation or the case pleaded by the petitioner in the present writ petition, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents 4, 7 and 8 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.08.2021 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and necessary parties concerned within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶36

gba/msm

¶37

¶38

The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶39

Represented by its Secretary of Government,

¶40

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, For.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶41

The Commissioner,

¶42

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 035.

¶43

The Joint Commissioner,

¶44

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶45

The District Collector,

¶46

Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶47

The Commissioner of Police,

¶48

Chennai City Police,

¶49

Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶50

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶51

6. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ambattur Police Districy, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.
7. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kundrathur, Kancheepuram District.
8. The Tahsildar, Kundrathur Taluk Office, Kundrathur, Kancheepuram District.
9. The Inspector of Police, Mangadu Police Station, Chennai.
+1cc to Mr.K.Yuvaraj, Advocate SR.No.56471
W.P.No.23555 of 2021
VBM(CO) GMY(10/12/2021)

¶52

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Thangaraj v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thangaraj v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Senthilkumar Vs The Sub Registrar

V.Kanagarasu Vs The District Collector

M.Natarajan Vs the Tahsildhar

M.Kannappan, 55 Yrs, Vs the State Rep by Its

Anjan Vs The District Collector

Sree Lalitha Vs the Assistant Settlement Officer (North)